User talk:Nergaal/dead: Difference between revisions
→May 2014: huh? |
|||
Line 105: | Line 105: | ||
Even if I had intended to continue it seems that by now that will not be necessary anymore. It was quite surprising to me that I have been blocked for 2 days over something that it does not seem the blocker even cared to investigate beyond reading the ANI message. Why wasn't the page protected from moving instead? I sincerely shocked by the rationale of the decliner. If this is the sort of respect I get from admins after all the contributions I've offered to wikipedia during these years it is really hard to even care anymore. [[User:Nergaal|Nergaal]] ([[User talk:Nergaal#top|talk]]) 17:44, 4 May 2014 (UTC) |
Even if I had intended to continue it seems that by now that will not be necessary anymore. It was quite surprising to me that I have been blocked for 2 days over something that it does not seem the blocker even cared to investigate beyond reading the ANI message. Why wasn't the page protected from moving instead? I sincerely shocked by the rationale of the decliner. If this is the sort of respect I get from admins after all the contributions I've offered to wikipedia during these years it is really hard to even care anymore. [[User:Nergaal|Nergaal]] ([[User talk:Nergaal#top|talk]]) 17:44, 4 May 2014 (UTC) |
||
*I have unblocked you. Happy editing, I hope. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 01:56, 5 May 2014 (UTC) |
*I have unblocked you. Happy editing, I hope. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 01:56, 5 May 2014 (UTC) |
||
::Unacceptable. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 02:16, 5 May 2014 (UTC) |
|||
== WikiCup 2014 April newsletter == |
== WikiCup 2014 April newsletter == |
Revision as of 02:19, 5 May 2014
GA status
Nergaal, I would happily nominate those two articles for GA status but you would have to do the review because I am currently busy. Jessy (talk) (contribs) • 21:27, April 2, 2011 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Could PH2 b Be Potentially Habitable - Or Not?
Copied from Talk:PH2 b#Could PH2 b Be Potentially Habitable - Or Not:
The Signpost: 02 April 2014
- WikiProject report: Deutschland in English
- Special report: On the cusp of the Wikimedia Conference
- Featured content: April Fools
- Traffic report: Regressing to the mean
?
Why is my IP (188.24.179.6) labeled as an open proxy? I've been using this IP for years
- (Unblock request removed as this account is not blocked). I have asked at Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies/Requests#188.24.179.6 for this to be looked into. See also WP:WikiProject on open proxies/Help:blocked. JohnCD (talk) 16:15, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, the message I was getting was not very clear about what to do. Nergaal (talk) 16:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Re: Motorway map
Hi, regarding your suggestions about the map, I disagree with removing some of the routes displayed and I consider the map should represent the planned network for the long term (as in the map of the planned numbering system). I strongly disagree with changing the graphical layout of the map, as that would result in a lack of consistency and too many (rather unnecessary) line styles (the current layout it is reasonable in making a difference between planned, under construction and completed sections). The tendered sections, once the tender is complete and the contract is signed, can be drawn with dashed lines. I agree that the route between Buzău and Galaţi should be added too. Regards, BaboneCar (talk) 07:51, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 09 April 2014
- News and notes: Round 2 of FDC funding open to public comments
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Law
- Special report: Community mourns passing of Adrianne Wadewitz
- Traffic report: Conquest of the Couch Potatoes
- Featured content: Snow heater and Ash sweep
The Signpost: 23 April 2014
- Special report: 2014 Wikimedia Conference—what is the impact?
- News and notes: Wikimedian passes away
- WikiProject_report: To the altar—Catholicism
- Wikimania: Winning bid announced for 2015
- Traffic report: Reflecting in Gethsemane
- Featured content: There was I, waiting at the church
The Signpost: 30 April 2014
- News and notes: WMF's draft annual plan turns indigestible as an FDC proposal
- Traffic report: Going to the Doggs
- Breaking: The Foundation's new executive director
- WikiProject report: Genetics
- Interview: Wikipedia in the Peabody Essex Museum
- Featured content: Browsing behaviours
- Recent research: Wikipedia predicts flu more accurately than Google
Post-transition metals
Did you discuss the move & its consequences somewhere? -DePiep (talk) 17:13, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
- More precise: please revert. Undiscussed, "OR" for a grouping page title, sloppy effects all around, calling Al a post-transition metal is, well, disputed. -DePiep (talk) 20:41, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
- Calling them other metals is well, at least unprofessional. I don't care about what name will be chosen as long as the qualifier is not "other". Other refers to not-a-category which is well explained in the title. Nergaal (talk) 20:44, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
- Then propose that before moving. You know where, why & how. -DePiep (talk) 21:20, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
- It's controversial. Please revert &tc. -DePiep (talk) 21:27, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
- Continue at WT:ELEM. -DePiep (talk) 00:25, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
- Calling them other metals is well, at least unprofessional. I don't care about what name will be chosen as long as the qualifier is not "other". Other refers to not-a-category which is well explained in the title. Nergaal (talk) 20:44, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
ANI notice
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Move edit warring the metals. Thank you. -DePiep (talk) 21:10, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
May 2014
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:30, 3 May 2014 (UTC)Nergaal (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am pretty sure I have the right to defend my actions and to answer to dubious allegations made on the ANI noticeboard. Nergaal (talk) 07:55, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Although you have no "rights" so to speak, this block is due to a community evaluation of your edits. If you wish to be unblocked, please read WP:GAB and WP:AAB to help you to compose your request (I recommend NOT starting at a point of "it's dubious"). If instead you wish to contribute to the ANI thread, you may start a new section below, call it "My comments to ANI", state your exact comments, then use {{helpme}} and ask for them to be copied over the panda ₯’ 09:56, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
- @DangerousPanda: can you tell me what the point of keeping him blocked is? Blocks aren't meant to punitive -- whether you like it or not. — lfdder 12:19, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- Such a bizarre statement, and wholly non-AGF. Yes, punitive blocks are abhorrent. However, as per Drmies question below, until the community is convinced the move-warring won't continue, the block remains. This is the key element of WP:GAB, after all. If his unblock request had addressed the issues, and ensured the behaviour wouldn't continue, he'd already be unblocked - by me. the panda ₯’ 15:20, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, whereas, refusing to unblock him on the suspicion that he will continue to move war is AGF. He should've been unblocked a few hours later (and after a talking-to), and if he continued to move war (doubtful), reblocked. Blocking him for 2 days right from the start is incomprehensible. — lfdder 16:27, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- Such a bizarre statement, and wholly non-AGF. Yes, punitive blocks are abhorrent. However, as per Drmies question below, until the community is convinced the move-warring won't continue, the block remains. This is the key element of WP:GAB, after all. If his unblock request had addressed the issues, and ensured the behaviour wouldn't continue, he'd already be unblocked - by me. the panda ₯’ 15:20, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- Nergaal, do you intend to continue the move war? If so, you won't be unblocked. Drmies (talk) 14:15, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
Even if I had intended to continue it seems that by now that will not be necessary anymore. It was quite surprising to me that I have been blocked for 2 days over something that it does not seem the blocker even cared to investigate beyond reading the ANI message. Why wasn't the page protected from moving instead? I sincerely shocked by the rationale of the decliner. If this is the sort of respect I get from admins after all the contributions I've offered to wikipedia during these years it is really hard to even care anymore. Nergaal (talk) 17:44, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
- I have unblocked you. Happy editing, I hope. Drmies (talk) 01:56, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
WikiCup 2014 April newsletter
Round 3 of the 2014 WikiCup has just begun; 32 competitors remain. Pool G's Adam Cuerden (submissions) was Round 2's highest scorer, with a large number of featured picture credits. In March/April, he restored star charts from Urania's Mirror, lithographs of various warships (such as SMS Gefion) and assorted other historical media. Second overall was Pool E's Godot13 (submissions), whose featured list Silver certificate (United States) contains dozens of scans of banknotes recently promoted to featured picture status. Third was Pool G's ChrisGualtieri (submissions) who has produced a large number of good articles, many, including Falkner Island, on Connecticut-related topics. Other successful participants included Cliftonian (submissions), who saw three articles (including the top-importance Ian Smith) through featured article candidacies, and Caponer (submissions), who saw three lists (including the beautifully-illustrated list of plantations in West Virginia) through featured list candidacies. High-importance good articles promoted this round include narwhal from Reid,iain james (submissions), tiger from Cwmhiraeth (submissions) and The Lion King from Igordebraga (submissions). We also saw our first featured topic points of the competition, awarded to Czar (submissions) and Red Phoenix (submissions) for their work on the Sega Genesis topic. No points have been claimed so far for good topics or featured portals.
192 was our lowest qualifying score, again showing that this WikiCup is the most competitive ever. In previous years, 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) or 100 (2010) secured a place in Round 3. Pool H was the strongest performer, with all but one of its members advancing, while only the two highest scorers in Pools G and F advanced. At the end of June, 16 users will advance into the semi-finals. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 17:57, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
American football FAC
Hey, I noticed you haven't responded to my fixes in adding athlete numbers to the article. If you have the time could you come to the page and perhaps strike those concerns, or add others if needed? I really appreciate your input regardless. :) Toa Nidhiki05 00:55, 5 May 2014 (UTC)